turtledovefandomcom-20200216-history
Forum:Nuremberg Defendants MWIH
I had occasion to review MWiH for the article on Streicher (I noticed Rosenberg's name is tossed off, hence his newly created article), and I realized that while HT doesn't name every single defendant, he is rather more specific about who is on trial than not. He points out that there are nearly two dozen defendants (in OTL it was 22--Bormann was MIA his remains were found in the 1970s and Ley had committed suicide in October, 1945), names several (Goring, Jodl, Keitel, Ribbentrop, Hess, Streicher, Roseberg), and given how that book went, it's probably safe to assume that the defendants HT gave us was the same as OTL. So we have some untapped article potential here. Now, in addition to the defendants HT actually named in MwIH, we have Karl Dönitz, Ernst Kaltenbrunner, Albert Speer and Hjalmar Horace Greeley Schacht. At one time, I did include Kaltenbrunner and Schact in MwIH, and included a quick paragraph with an asterisk in their articles. I removed those recently because of our somewhat stricter policies, but I am now rethinking that. Options that occur to me: 1. Create a general article for the Nuremberg trials, list the 24 defendants, create links to the historical figures we already have, then write the MwIH section explaining how things went in the book, WITHOUT creating new articles for individual defendants. 2. Go ahead and create new articles for every defendant (save Bormann and Ley) on the strength of the line about nearly two dozen defendants. We've had historical figures on slimmer reeds, plus each of those defendants, for good and for ill, were impacted by the actions of the GFF. Bormann and Ley, of course, were already dead, and nothing the GFF did changed that, so they don't need articles at this time. By my count that would generate 11 new historical figure articles, although they'd be fairly redundant. 3. Create the Nuremberg trials article AND the new articles for each defendant (again, excluding Bormann and Ley). I also point out that we have some precedence for at least option two from the same book: I created articles for each of the 10 physicists, primarily because HT named like 7 out of the 10, so it made sense to just add the remaining three. TR 20:57, December 26, 2011 (UTC) :In my gut I like option 1, even though I'm a big fan of adding more historicals, and even though just last fall I created articles for Breckenridge and Bell based on a much less detailed line in LatA (but one which both the context of the line and the POD of the story left absolutely no room for doubt as to whom Lee was referring). I do prefer articles with more meat than "He was a member of a group that was referred to in this passage." :Maybe we could hybridize options 1 and 3: create the article on Nuremberg and list the defendants, and then create new articles for however many of the eleven you've named are really notorious people with whom we could have fun writing OTL intros and adding to sexy categories. The downside is that consistency really is a virtue. Turtle Fan 23:08, December 26, 2011 (UTC) ::Arguably, we've already got the notorious ones--the remainder are kind of the cogs in the machinery as it were, save for perhaps Frick (who wrote the Nuremberg Laws) and Von Papen (the chancellor before Hitler). Von Papen is especially tempting just to help diversify the Chancellors category, but I think in the interests of consistency, I'd vote for option one, and then if HT uses one or more of the remaining 11 in another work, then throw in a paragraph for MwIH. So I'd also vote for MwIH sections for Donitz, Speer, Kaltenbruner, and Schacht. TR 02:48, December 27, 2011 (UTC) :::Sounds good to me. I realy wasn't sure who was left after the ones we have, so I didn't know if I was advocating against writing about someone with a big name. Turtle Fan 03:25, December 27, 2011 (UTC) :At any rate, we should definitely at least create the Nuremberg Trials article. The significance of its MwIH version justifies its existence all by itself, but even overlooking that, it's good to have articles on very significant events in periods which HT frequently revisits. We've talked before about how nice a Treaty of Versailles article would be, for instance--and maybe that too is an idea whose time has come. Turtle Fan 23:12, December 26, 2011 (UTC)